Differential effects of direct and cross examination on mock jurors’ perceptions and memory in cases of child sexual abuse

References

• Andrews, S.J., Ahern, E.C., Stolzenberg, S.N., & Lyon, T.D. (2016). The productivity of wh‐prompts when children testify. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 30(3), 341–349. doi:10.1002/acp.3204
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrews, S.J., Lamb, M.E., & Lyon, T.D. (2015). Question types, responsiveness and self‐contradictions when prosecutors and defense attorneys question alleged victims of child sexual abuse. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 29(2), 253–261. doi:10.1002/acp.3103
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Black, J.B., & Bern, H. (1981). Causal coherence and memory for events in narratives. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20(3), 267–275. doi:10.1016/S0022-5371(81)90417-5
   Google Scholar
• Bottoms, B.L., Golding, J.M., Stevenson, M.C., Wiley, T.R.A., & Yozwiak, J.A. (2007). A review of factors affecting jurors’ decisions in child sexual abuse cases. In M.P. Toglia, J.D. Read, D.F. Ross, & R.C.L. Lindsay (Eds.), The handbook of eyewitness psychology, Vol. 1: Memory for events (pp. 509–543). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Buckner, J.P., & Fivush, R. (1998). Gender and self in children’s autobiographical narratives. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 12(4), 407–429. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-0720(199808)12:4 < 407::AID-ACP575 > 3.0.CO;2-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castelli, P., Goodman, G.S., & Ghetti, S. (2005). Effects of interview style and witness age on perceptions of children’s credibility in sexual abuse cases. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 35(2), 297–317. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2005.tb02122.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ceci, S.J., & Bruck, M. (1995). Jeopardy in the courtroom: A scientific analysis of children’s testimony: Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar
• Cleveland, K.C., & Quas, J.A. (2016). Adults’ insensitivity to developmental changes in children’s ability to report when and how many times abuse occurred. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 34(1), 126–138. doi:10.1002/bsl.2211
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooper, A., Quas, J.A., & Cleveland, K.C. (2014). The emotional child witness: Effects on juror decision‐making. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 32(6), 813–828. doi:10.1002/bsl.2153
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Costabile, K.A., & Klein, S.B. (2005). Finishing strong: Recency effects in juror judgments. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 27(1), 47–58. doi:10.1207/s15324834basp2701_5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davies, E., & Seymour, F.W. (1998). Questioning child complainants of sexual abuse: Analysis of criminal court transcripts in New Zealand. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 5(1), 47–61. doi:10.1080/13218719809524919
   Google Scholar
• Fivush, R., Haden, C., & Adam, S. (1995). Structure and coherence of preschoolers’ personal narratives over time: Implications for childhood amnesia. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 60(1), 32–56. doi:10.1006/jecp.1995.1030
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greene, E. (1981). Whodunit? Memory for evidence in text. The American Journal of Psychology, 94(3), 479–496. doi:10.2307/1422258
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hope, L., Eales, N., & Mirashi, A. (2014). Assisting jurors: Promoting recall of trial information through the use of a trial‐ordered notebook. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 19(2), 316–331. doi:10.1111/lcrp.12003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klemfuss, J.Z., & Ceci, S.J. (2012). Legal and psychological perspectives on children’s competence to testify in court. Developmental Review, 32(3), 268–286. doi:10.1016/j.dr.2012.06.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klemfuss, J.Z., Cleveland, K.C., Quas, J.A., & Lyon, T.D. (2016). Relations between attorney temporal structure and children’s response productivity in cases of alleged child sexual abuse. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 22, 228–241. doi:10.1111/lcrp.12096
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klemfuss, J.Z., & Olaguez, A.P. (2018). Individual differences in children’s suggestibility: An updated review. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 29, 1–25. doi:10.1080/10538712.2018.1508108
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klemfuss, J.Z., Quas, J.A., & Lyon, T.D. (2014). Attorneys’ questions and children’s productivity in child sexual abuse criminal trials. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 28(5), 780–788. doi:10.1002/acp.3048
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kulkofsky, S., & Klemfuss, J.Z. (2008). What the stories children tell can tell about their memory: Narrative skill and young children’s suggestibility. Developmental Psychology, 44(5), 1442–1456. doi:10.1037/a0012849
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lamb, M.E., Hershkowitz, I., Orbach, Y., & Esplin, P.W. (2008). Tell me what happened: Structured investigative interviews of child victims and witnesses. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Lamb, M.E., Malloy, L.C., Hershkowitz, I., & La Rooy, D. (2015). Children and the law. In M. Lamb (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology and developmental science (7th ed., pp. 464–512). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Lerner, J.S., Li, Y., Valdesolo, P., & Kassam, K.S. (2015). Emotion and decision making. Annual Review of Psychology, 66(1), 799–823. doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115043
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mugno, A.P., Klemfuss, J.Z., & Lyon, T.D. (2016). Attorney questions predict jury‐eligible adult assessments of attorneys, child witnesses, and defendant guilt. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 34(1), 178–199. doi:10.1002/bsl.2214
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nelson, K., & Fivush, R. (2004). The emergence of autobiographical memory: A social cultural developmental theory. Psychological Review, 111(2), 486–511. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.111.2.486
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1986). Evidence evaluation in complex decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(2), 242–258. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.2.242
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1988). Explanation-based decision making: Effects of memory structure on judgment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14(3), 521–533. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.14.3.521
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1991). A cognitive theory of juror decision making: The story model. Cardozo Law Review, 13(2–3), 519–558.
   Google Scholar
• Pezdek, K., & Roe, C. (1995). The effect of memory trace strength on suggestibility. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 60(1), 116–128. doi:10.1006/jecp.1995.1034
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruva, C.L., & Guenther, C.C. (2015). From the shadows into the light: How pretrial publicity and deliberation affect mock jurors’ decisions, impressions, and memory. Law and Human Behavior, 39(3), 294–310. doi:10.1037/lhb0000117
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruva, C.L., & McEvoy, C. (2008). Negative and positive pretrial publicity affect juror memory and decision making. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 14(3), 226–235. doi:10.1037/1076-898X.14.3.226
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruva, C.L., McEvoy, C., & Bryant, J.B. (2007). Effects of pre‐trial publicity and jury deliberation on juror bias and source memory errors. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21(1), 45–67. doi:10.1002/acp.1254
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saywitz, K.J., Lyon, T.D., & Goodman, G.S. (2017). When interviewing children: A review and update. In B. Klika & J. Conte (Eds.), APSAC handbook on child maltreatment (4th ed., pp. 310–319). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Simon, D. (2004). A third view of the black box: Cognitive coherence in legal decision making. The University of Chicago Law Review, 71, 520–549.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stolzenberg, S.N., & Lyon, T.D. (2014). Evidence summarized in attorneys’ closing arguments predicts acquittals in criminal trials of child sexual abuse. Child Maltreatment, 19(2), 119–129. doi:10.1177/1077559514539388
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Szojka, Z.A., Andrews, S.J., Lamb, M.E., Stolzenberg, S.N., & Lyon, T.D. (2017). Challenging the credibility of alleged victims of child sexual abuse in Scottish courts. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 23(2), 200–210. doi:10.1037/law0000117
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thorndyke, P.W. (1977). Cognitive structures in comprehension and memory of narrative discourse. Cognitive Psychology, 9(1), 77–110. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(77)90005-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tubb, V.A., Wood, J.M., & Hosch, H.M. (1999). Effects of suggestive interviewing and indirect evidence on child credibility in a sexual abuse case. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29(6), 1111–1127. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1999.tb02031.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zacks, J.M., Tversky, B., & Iyer, G. (2001). Perceiving, remembering, and communicating structure in events. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130(1), 29–58. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.130.1.29
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zajac, R., & Cannan, P. (2009). Cross-examination of sexual assault complainants: A developmental comparison. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 16(sup1), S36–S54. doi:10.1080/13218710802620448
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zajac, R., Gross, J., & Hayne, H. (2003). Asked and answered: Questioning children in the courtroom. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 10(1), 199–209. doi:10.1375/pplt.2003.10.1.199
   Google Scholar
• Zajac, R., & Hayne, H. (2003). I don’t think that’s what really happened: The effect of cross-examination on the accuracy of children’s reports. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 9(3), 187–195. doi:10.1037/1076-898X.9.3.187
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zajac, R., & Hayne, H. (2006). The negative effect of cross-examination style questioning on children’s accuracy: older children are not immune. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20(1), 3–16. doi:10.1002/acp.1169
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar